An Ecological Economics Capital Stock
Approach to Quality of Life Assessment in
Burlington, Vermont, USA
Jon D. Erickson, Joseph Kelly, and Robert Costanza
Rubenstein School of Environment and Natural Resources
University of Vermont
and the Fall 2003 Introduction to Ecological Economics class:
C. Andrews, J. Antonucci, S. Augeri, E. Berliet, M. Birkby, W. Brennan, E. Brown,
M. Brundige, M. Buechler, M. Cohen, C. Coleman, C. Coogan, A. Cooper, K. Costello,
M. Crane, A. D'Aversa, A. Davis, J. DeCelles, A. Delgado, M. DiBiccari, H. Dudley,
J. Dye, A. Effler, M. Egbers, P. Freeman, M. Gilmartin, E. Graves, M. Hall,
C. Hancock, E. Harrison, E. Hartz, K. Hayes, C. Herold-Lind, R. Holthaus, D. Hubbard,
H. Johansson, L. Junger, B. Kelly, A. Kirschner, A. Klein, M. Martin, I. Marvin,
C. McCreight, B. O'Donoghue, M. Palmer, B. Parke, A. Pearlstein, J. Randall,
C. Reeves, D. Rosa, C. Smith, J. Smith, R. Sterling, C. Sullivan, T. Van Etten, T.,
A. Verinis, P. Virchick, A. Voinov, J. Waters
Photo: Anton Voinov
Previous Surveys
SURVEY
YEAR
SPONSOR
Old North End
Neighborhood Survey
2000
UVM Comm.
NH QOL
Leadership Project
Vermonter Poll
2003
(yearly)
UVM Center for
Rural Studies
Pulse of Vermont
2000
VT Business
(every 5) Roundtable
Statewide QOL
Community Needs
Assessment
2000
United Way of
(every 5) Chittenden Cty.
Community needs
assessment
Civic Participation in
Vermont
2000
Snelling Center
Attitudes about civic
participation
Champlain
Initiative
Children’s
acquistion of 40
developmental
assets
Our Children, Our
1999
Future Youth, and
Developmental Assets
FOCUS
Overall life satisfac.
NH cohesiveness
Eight Neighborhoods
1 – New North End
2-1
2 – Old North End
1-1
3 – Downtown
2-2
4 – Collegetown
1-2
2-3
2-4
5 – Northeast
6 – The Hill
3-1
7 – Pine Street
3-2
8 – South End
4-1 5-1
4-3
5-2
4-2
6-2
6-1
5-3
10-1
9-1
9-2
9-3
7-1
7-2
8-1
10-2
11-2
8-2
11-1
Thanks to Margaret Bozik from
CEDO Burlington, and Eric
Brown our resident pizza guy!
C
ew
ow
Census
Survey
So
ut
h
H
En
d
t
ill
st
n
n
re
e
e
St
Th
ea
To
w
or
th
Pi
ne
N
nd
.E
nd
.E
nt
ow
N
N
ol
le
ge
D
O
ld
N
Neighborhood Populations
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Census
N
o
h
ig
h
Hi
g
H
Sample
ho
ol
ol
te
s
ho
Sc
Sc
cia
e
or
s
du
at
ch
el
As
so
Ba
G
ra
Education
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
Income
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
Under
$15,000
$15,000$30,000
$30,000$60,000
Census
$60,000$120,000
Sample
Over
$120,000
Survey Questions
I.
II.
III.
IV.
V.
VI.
VII.
Neighborhood Identity
Built Capital
Natural Capital
Human Capital
Social Capital
Total Quality of Life
Demographics
Photo: Anton Voinov
Neighborhood Identity
Please rank the top five regions according to which ones you most
identify with as your home, from 1 (most identify) to 5 (least
identify).
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
Most Identify (1st)
Least Identify (5th)
er
O
th
W
or
ld
a
er
ic
Am
or
th
N
U
ni
te
d
st
St
a
te
s
U.
S.
d
or
th
ea
En
gl
an
t
ew
nt
y
rm
on
Ve
N
N
hi
tt
en
de
n
Co
u
rli
n
Bu
C
N
ei
g
hb
or
ho
od
gt
on
0%
Importance vs. Happiness
For questions rating
importance:
For questions rating
happiness:
[1] Very important
[2] Important
[3] Neither important
or unimportant
[4] Unimportant
[5] Very unimportant
[1] Very happy
[2] Happy
[3] Neither happy
or unhappy
[4] Unhappy
[5] Very unhappy
Photo: Anton Voinov
Built Capital
How important are the things you own or rent (for
example, your home, car, furniture, clothes,
etc.) to your happiness and quality of life?
Photo: Anton Voinov
Built Capital Importance
(Burlington)
50%
46%
45%
40%
35%
30%
Mean = 2.07
Std. Dev. = 0.98
30%
25%
20%
15%
15%
10%
6%
3%
5%
0%
Very
Important
Important
Neither
Unimportant
Very
Important or
Unimportant
Unimportant
BUILT CAPITAL
Importance less Happiness Scores
Less Happy than Important
Equal
More Happy than Important
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
Mean Importance:
Home
1.58
Food & Drink 1.85
Transportation 2.24
Entertainment 2.64
Cons. Durables 2.67
Pers. Access. 2.67
Mean Happiness:
Food & Drink 1.77
Home
1.85
Entertainment 2.08
Transportation 2.12
Pers. Access. 2.16
Cons. Durables 2.19
10%
0%
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
Home
Transportation
Food & drink
Consumer durables
Personal accessories
Entertainment goods
City Wide Built Capital Happiness
Built Capital
Average
Happiness
2.07
Public Investment
2.38
Private Investment
2.35
Photo: Anton Voinov
Are you happy with your current family or personal yearly income?
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
No
50%
Yes
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
under 15
15-30
30-60
60-120
over 120
Percent “Yes” for Burlington = 66%
If not, how much more income per year
would you need to be satisfied?
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
under 5K
5-10K
10-25K
25-50K
50-100K
100K-1
Million
over a
Million
Natural Capital
How important is the quality of the natural
environment in which you live (for example,
air, water, open space, cleanliness) to your
happiness and quality of life?
Natural Capital Importance
(Burlington)
70%
63%
60%
Mean = 1.53
Std. Dev. = 0.83
50%
40%
30%
26%
20%
8%
10%
2%
2%
0%
Very
Important
Important
Neither
Unimportant
Very
Important or
Unimportant
Unimportant
Built Capital Importance
(Burlington)
50%
46%
45%
40%
35%
30%
Mean = 2.07
Std. Dev. = 0.98
30%
25%
20%
15%
15%
10%
6%
3%
5%
0%
Very
Important
Important
Neither
Unimportant
Very
Important or
Unimportant
Unimportant
Natural Capital
Importance minus Happiness Scores
60%
Less Happy than Important
Equal
More Happy than Important
50%
40%
30%
20%
Mean Importance:
Air Quality
Water Resources
Cleanliness
Public Open Space
Noise
Mean Happiness:
Air Quality
Water Resources
Public Open Space
Cleanliness
Noise
1.46
1.57
1.68
1.91
2.10
1.85
1.94
2.07
2.17
2.41
10%
0%
-4
-3
Air Quality
-2
-1
Water Resources
0
1
Public Open Space
2
3
4
Noise
Cleanliness
Human Capital
How important are investments made in
yourself (for example, education, job skills,
health, spirituality) to your happiness and
quality of life?
Photo: Anton Voinov
Human Capital Importance (Burlington)
70%
65%
60%
Mean = 1.46
Std. Dev. = 0.77
50%
40%
28%
30%
20%
10%
5%
1%
2%
0%
Very
Important
Important
Neither
Unimportant
Very
Important or
Unimportant
Unimportant
Human Capital
Importance minus Happiness Scores
60%
Less Happy than Important
Equal
More Happy than Important
50%
40%
Mean Importance:
Mean Happiness:
30%
Health Care
Mental Well-Being
Education
1.62
1.71
1.80
Mental Well-Being
Education
Health Care
1.92
1.93
2.12
20%
Job
Exercise
1.86
2.12
Job
Exercise
2.28
2.33
10%
0%
-4
-3
Job
-2
Education
-1
0
Health Care
1
2
Mental Well-Being
3
Exercise
4
Social Capital
How important are relationships with your family and
friends to your happiness and quality of life?
How important are interactions with people in your
neighborhood to your happiness and quality of life?
Social Capital Importance
(Family & Friends, Burlington)
90%
80%
80%
70%
Mean = 1.28
Std. Dev. = 0.70
60%
50%
40%
30%
16%
20%
10%
2%
1%
2%
0%
Very
Important
Important
Neither
Unimportant
Very
Important or
Unimportant
Unimportant
Social Capital Importance
(Neighbors, Burlington)
40%
35%
35%
34%
30%
Mean = 2.49
Std. Dev. = 1.01
25%
20%
17%
15%
11%
10%
4%
5%
0%
Very
Important
Important
Neither
Unimportant
Very
Important or
Unimportant
Unimportant
Social Capital
Importance less Happiness Scores
Less Happy than Important
Equal
More Happy than Important
60%
Mean Importance:
Friends & Fam. 1.25
Safety
1.56
Public Educ.
1.82
Government
1.87
Higher Educ. 1.92
Organizations 2.30
Sense of Com. 2.32
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
Mean Happiness:
Friends & Fam. 1.62
Safety
1.96
Higher Educ. 2.09
Organizations 2.18
Government
2.33
Sense of Com. 2.39
Public Educ.
2.41
0%
-4
-3
-2
Government
Sense of Community
Organizations
-1
0
Public Education
Safety
1
2
3
Higher Education
Friends and Family
4
Total Quality of Life
How would you rate your overall quality of life (on a scale
from 1 [very high] to 5 [very low])?
Please distribute 100 points across the following four
categories according to their importance to your overall
quality of life.
Personal and public investments in your home,
lifestyle, and neighborhood
Investments and access to the natural environment
in or near your neighborhood
Your personal well-being and investments made in
yourself
Your relationship with your family, friends, and
community
Photo: Anton Voinov
Total Quality of Life Happiness
(Burlington)
47%
50%
45%
40%
35%
Mean = 1.91
Std. Dev. = 0.90
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
10%
6%
5%
2%
0%
Very Happy
Happy
Neither
Happy or
Unhappy
Unhappy
Very
Unhappy
Distribution of Importance
of Capital Stocks
Built
20%
Social
36%
Natural
18%
Human
26%
Time Allocation
Please distribute 100 points across the following
four categories according to their importance to
your overall quality of life.
Personal and public investments in your home, lifestyle,
and neighborhood
Investments and access to the natural environment in or
near your neighborhood
Your personal well-being and investments made in
yourself
Your relationship with your family, friends, and
community
Time Distribution by Income Group
45
35
under15
30
15-30
25
30-60
20
60-120
15
over120
10
5
Personal
Family
Household
Chores
Volunteer
Work
0
Employment
Point Allocation
40
Overall Quality of Life (All)
Testing the Income Effect
100%
90%
Student Effect?
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
under15
15-30
Very happy or happy
30-60
60-120
over120
Neither, unhappy, or very unhappy
Overall Quality of Life (w/o Students)
Testing the Income Effect
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
Without Students
21% of respondents
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
under15
15-30
Very happy or happy
30-60
60-120
over120
Neither, unhappy, or very unhappy
Neighborhood Analysis
Total Quality of Life and
Happiness with Capital Stocks
2.00
Total Quality of Life
1.50
Built Capital
Natural Capital
1.00
Human Capital
0.50
Social Capital
C
ut
h
So
St
Pi
ne
En
d
re
et
ill
H
Th
e
st
N
or
th
ea
n
To
w
ol
le
ge
nt
ow
n
ow
D
N
nd
O
ld
N
ew
N
.E
ng
to
n
rli
.E
nd
0.00
Bu
Average
Happiness Score
2.50
New North End
Avg. Quality of Life
2-1
Ranking (Data)
6 (1.95)
1-1
2-2
1-2
2-3
2-4
3-1
3-2
4-1 5-1
4-3
5-2
4-2
6-2
6-1
5-3
10-1
9-1
9-2
9-3
7-1
Avg. Happiness with:
Built Capital
Natural Capital
Human Capital
Social Capital
4
4
4
2
(1.99)
(2.01)
(2.11)
(2.01)
Avg. Time Spent doing:
Employment
Volunteer Activities
Household Chores
Family Activities
Personal Activities
4
3
1
2
8
(33%)
(9%)
(21%)
(19%)
(20%)
7-2
8-1
10-2
11-2
8-2
11-1
Percent with Health Ins. 4 (93%)
Home Ownership
1 (73%)
Satisfied with Yrly Income 2 (75%)
Old North End
Ranking (Data)
Avg. Quality of Life
8 (2.10)
2-1
1-1
2-2
1-2
2-3
2-4
3-1
3-2
4-1 5-1
4-3
5-2
4-2
6-2
6-1
5-3
10-1
9-1
9-2
9-3
7-1
Avg. Happiness with:
Built Capital
Natural Capital
Human Capital
Social Capital
7
8
2
4
(2.11)
(2.35)
(2.00)
(2.25)
Avg. Time Spent doing:
Employment
Volunteer Activities
Household Chores
Family Activities
Personal Activities
2
5
3
8
6
(37%)
(7%)
(19%)
(16%)
(23%)
7-2
8-1
10-2
11-2
8-2
11-1
Percent with Health Ins. 8 (81%)
Home Ownership
4 (55%)
Satisfied with Yrly Income 7 (52%)
Downtown
Avg. Quality of Life
2-1
Ranking (Data)
7 (2.10)
1-1
2-2
1-2
2-3
2-4
3-1
3-2
4-1 5-1
4-3
5-2
4-2
6-2
6-1
5-3
10-1
9-1
9-2
9-3
7-1
Avg. Happiness with:
Built Capital
Natural Capital
Human Capital
Social Capital
8
7
5
8
(2.29)
(2.34)
(2.13)
(2.38)
Avg. Time Spent doing:
Employment
Volunteer Activities
Household Chores
Family Activities
Personal Activities
7
7
4
6
2
(26%)
(7%)
(18%)
(18%)
(33%)
7-2
8-1
10-2
11-2
8-2
11-1
Percent with Health Ins. 5 (93%)
Home Ownership
7 (15%)
Satisfied with Yrly Income 5 (64%)
Collegetown
Avg. Quality of Life
2-1
Ranking (Data)
3 (1.88)
1-1
2-2
1-2
2-3
2-4
3-1
3-2
4-1 5-1
4-3
5-2
4-2
6-2
6-1
5-3
10-1
9-1
9-2
9-3
7-1
Avg. Happiness with:
Built Capital
Natural Capital
Human Capital
Social Capital
5
6
7
7
(2.07)
(2.31)
(2.22)
(2.33)
Avg. Time Spent doing:
Employment
Volunteer Activities
Household Chores
Family Activities
Personal Activities
5
8
8
3
1
(28%)
(6%)
(14%)
(19%)
(33%)
7-2
8-1
10-2
11-2
8-2
11-1
Percent with Health Ins. 7 (85%)
Home Ownership
6 (17%)
Satisfied w/ Yrly Income 8 (51%)
Northeast
Avg. Quality of Life
2-1
Ranking (Data)
5 (1.95)
1-1
2-2
1-2
2-3
2-4
3-1
3-2
4-1 5-1
4-3
5-2
4-2
6-2
6-1
5-3
10-1
9-1
9-2
9-3
7-1
Avg. Happiness with:
Built Capital
Natural Capital
Human Capital
Social Capital
3
5
3
6
(1.92)
(2.21)
(2.08)
(2.27)
Avg. Time Spent doing:
Employment
Volunteer Activities
Household Chores
Family Activities
Personal Activities
6
2
2
7
4
(27%)
(11%)
(20%)
(17%)
(27%)
7-2
8-1
10-2
11-2
8-2
11-1
Percent with Health Ins. 1 (100%)
Home Ownership
8 (7%)
Satisfied with Yrly Income 3 (68%)
The Hill
Ranking (Data)
Avg. Quality of Life
1 (1.50)
2-1
1-1
2-2
1-2
2-3
2-4
3-1
3-2
4-1 5-1
4-3
5-2
4-2
6-2
6-1
5-3
10-1
9-1
9-2
9-3
7-1
Avg. Happiness with:
Built Capital
Natural Capital
Human Capital
Social Capital
2
1
1
1
(1.88)
(1.78)
(1.96)
(2.01)
Avg. Time Spent doing:
Employment
Volunteer Activities
Household Chores
Family Activities
Personal Activities
8
4
7
1
3
(24%)
(8%)
(14%)
(26%)
(29%)
7-2
8-1
10-2
11-2
8-2
11-1
Percent with Health Ins. 2 (98%)
Home Ownership
2 (73%)
Satisfied w/ Yrly Income 1 (77%)
Pine Street
Avg. Quality of Life
2-1
Ranking (Data)
4 (1.89)
1-1
2-2
1-2
2-3
2-4
3-1
3-2
4-1 5-1
4-3
5-2
4-2
6-2
6-1
5-3
10-1
9-1
9-2
9-3
7-1
Avg. Happiness with:
Built Capital
Natural Capital
Human Capital
Social Capital
6
3
8
3
(2.08)
(1.98)
(2.22)
(2.14)
Avg. Time Spent doing:
Employment
Volunteer Activities
Household Chores
Family Activities
Personal Activities
3
6
5
5
5
(33%)
(7%)
(17%)
(18%)
(24%)
7-2
8-1
10-2
11-2
8-2
11-1
Percent with Health Ins. 6 (90%)
Home Ownership
5 (51%)
Satisfied with Yrly Income 6 (63%)
South End
Avg. Quality of Life
2-1
Ranking (Data)
2 (1.85)
1-1
2-2
1-2
2-3
2-4
3-1
3-2
4-1 5-1
4-3
5-2
4-2
6-2
6-1
5-3
10-1
9-1
9-2
9-3
7-1
Avg. Happiness with:
Built Capital
Natural Capital
Human Capital
Social Capital
1
2
6
5
(1.82)
(1.92)
(2.22)
(2.26)
Avg. Time Spent doing:
Employment
Volunteer Activities
Household Chores
Family Activities
Personal Activities
1
1
6
4
7
(37%)
(13%)
(15%)
(19%)
(21%)
7-2
8-1
10-2
11-2
8-2
11-1
Percent with Health Ins. 3 (95%)
Home Ownership
3 (61%)
Satisfied with Yrly Income 4 (67%)
Burlington v. EcoVillages
Average Score
(1=not at all to 5= very greatly)
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
Total Quality
of Life
Built C apital
Natural
C apital
Burlington
Human
C apital
Social
C apital1
(Friends &
Family)
Intentional C ommunities
Social
C apital2
(Neighbors)
Thanks to:
• Burlington Legacy Project
(www.cedo.ci.burlington.vt.us/legacy/)
– In particular the Community Indicators committee,
Betsy Rosenbluth, and Sandra O’Flaherty.
• Community and Economic Development Office
(www.cedoburlington.org)
– In particular Margaret Bozik and Beth Ruzansky.
• UVM and Gund Faculty
– In particular, Bob Costanza, Josh Farley, Lynne Bond,
Matthew Wilson, Gary Flo, and Roel Boumans.
Photo: Anton Voinov
Evolving analysis and results
posted at:
www.uvm.edu/~jdericks/QOL/
Photo: Anton Voinov